Advocacy group sues over early-release law

PRISONS

A crime-victims advocacy group has filed a lawsuit against the state, saying a new law allowing the early release of prison inmates is unconstitutional and jeopardizes the public.

The suit, filed Tuesday in Placer County Superior Court by Crime Victims United of California, seeks to block the state from releasing prisoners early.

The group announced the suit Wednesday at Bill Bean Jr. Memorial Park, named for a Sacramento police officer who was slain 11 years ago by a parolee.

The state law, aimed at saving the state millions of dollars by easing overcrowding, took effect Jan. 25. State officials estimate that about 6,500 inmates in state prisons will be released early over the next year. In addition, to cut costs, the state will reduce parole agents' caseloads to focus on "high risk" parolees.

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Secretary Matthew Cate has touted the law as a "landmark achievement" that will enhance public safety by improving the parole system.

However, attorney Nina Salarno Ashford, executive board member of Crime Victims United of California, said the new policies will do the exact opposite.

The law, she said, violates a number of provisions added to the state Constitution in 2008, when voters passed Proposition 9, a victims' rights and parole measure known as Marsy's Law.

"Bill Bean Jr. was murdered while in the line of duty by a, quote, nonviolent, low-level parolee, and the parolee was apprehended quickly because at that time there was a parole agent watching him," she said. "However, sadly, if another Sacramento police officer or another officer anywhere in the state loses their life in the coming years, that would not happen, because Gov. Schwarzenegger and the (corrections department) have seen fit that low-level parolees will no longer be supervised."

The suit contends that the state Constitution prohibits the early release of prisoners because of crowding, that crime victims have a right to weigh in before an inmate is released and that the state is legally bound to provide adequate prisons. It also challenges a key portion of the law, the so-called day for day provision that awards nonviolent inmates a six-month credit reduction for every six months served. Previously, inmates who behaved themselves served as little as two-thirds of their sentence; now, nonviolent convicts can serve as little as half their sentence.

A spokesman for the California attorney general's office declined to comment on the suit.

"The day-for-day credit is illegal - the sentence handed down by the judiciary needs to be served," Salarno Ashford said.

The law has been particularly controversial because there has been confusion over its implementation at the local level, with counties interpreting the law differently. Some counties have let out only a few inmates early, while others interpreted the law to apply retroactively and released hundreds. Two lawsuits have already been filed by unions representing sheriff's deputies in Sacramento and Orange counties, both challenging the local releases.

On Tuesday, state Attorney General Jerry Brown attempted to clear up some of the confusion by issuing a bulletin asserting that the law is not retroactive and that credits should be applied only for time served after Jan. 25.